Hearth Record

Horizon Home Health Magic Valley

A home health agency in Twin Falls, Idaho 83301

855 N College Rd, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301. (208) 733-2840.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 21, 2026.

The last 24 months 4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Mar 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean3
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.

What did inspectors find?

The last inspection on record was on Mar 12, 2026: a recertification inspection.

4 deficiencies cited in the last three years.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

4 deficiencies in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Mar 2026. Most serious: Standard-level. The last 3 years, to Oct 24, 2026.

4 deficiencies by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 NovDec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOct

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Mar 12, 2026: recertification inspection4 deficiencies
  • Track Adverse Patient Events

    The inspectors’ words, 548 words

    “Track adverse patient events CFR(s): 484.65(c)(2) Performance improvement activities must track adverse patient events, analyze their causes, and implement preventive actions. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: Based on policy review, medical record review, and staff interview, it was determined the HHA failed to follow its own established policy for investigating and responding to a serious adverse event for 1 of 1 sampled patient who experienced an unexpected death (Patient #1). This failure to investigate and possibly identify issues, put all HHA patients at risk of additional harm and resulted in incomplete QAPI data. Findings include: The HHA had a policy titled, “Incident Reporting” with revised date of December 2025 with the stated purpose: “To define the reporting, follow-up, and feedback process for incidents involving patients and organization personnel.” The policy continued, “5. To investigate and respond to serious adverse events, in accordance with accrediting bodies standards.” The policy defines serious adverse event as “an unexpected occurrence involving death.” The policy continued, “The Performance Improvement Coordinator will review the incident reports and conduct follow-up as indicated. Corrective actions will be implemented and evaluated for effectiveness as indicated.” This policy was not followed. An example included: Patient #1 was 70-year-old man who was admitted to the HHA on 4/11/25 for skilled nursing services with “goals of medication management, community engagement and understanding of conditions and how to prevent rehospitalization. The patient received an initial RN visit on 4/11/25. Patient #1’s initial visit documented history of falls, decline in mental, emotional or behavioral status in the past 3 months, reported or observed history of difficulty complying with any medical instructions, currently taking 5 or more medication, currently reports exhaustion and other risks.” In addition, the initial visit documented Alcohol Dependence and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder with symptoms listed as “2-controlled with difficult, affecting daily functioning, patent needs ongoing monitoring.” Patient #1’s chart documented “alcohol precautions” with no documented discussion or education on alcohol use with numerous psychiatric medications and oxygen need of 2LPM. Frequency/duration of visits in Patient #1’s chart documented “SN 1WK2” (one skilled nursing visit per week for 2 weeks). A Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) visit on 4/17/25 documented the patient was unsteady, weak, and occasionally confused. The record further documented drops in blood pressure, the LPN’s encouragement for the patient to seek ED evaluation. On 4/21/25, the record documented a call reporting the patient was “deceased.” No documentation was found in Patient #1’s record or in incident reports indicating the patient’s death was reported as an adverse event. The HHA could not provide documentation of an incident report, investigation, review, or corrective actions implemented in response to the death. During an interview on 3/11/26 beginning at 3:30 PM, the DCN reviewed Patient #1’s medical record and incident reports. The DCN stated Patient #1 died at home on 4/18/25 after being in the ED for only a few hours on 4/17/25 and confirmed there were no additional home visits prior to his death. The DCN, who was not in the position at the time of the event, reported she was not aware of any reporting, investigation, or follow‑up conducted in response to Patient #1’s death. The facility failed to record, investigate, or implement corrective actions for a serious adverse event as required by its own policy.”

    Rule G0654. Standard-level.

  • Infection Control

    The inspectors’ words, 297 words

    “Infection control CFR(s): 484.70(b)(1)(2) Standard: Control. The HHA must maintain a coordinated agency-wide program for the surveillance, identification, prevention, control, and investigation of infectious and communicable diseases that is an integral part of the HHA’s quality assessment and performance improvement (QAPI) program. The infection control program must include: (1) A method for identifying infectious and communicable disease problems; and (2) A plan for the appropriate actions that are expected to result in improvement and disease prevention. This Standard is not met as evidenced by: Based on medical record review, infection control records, quality reporting records, observational visits, and staff interviews, it was determined the agency failed to capture a patient infection in 1 of 10 Patients (Patient #9) whose records were reviewed. This had the potential for infection control measurements to be inaccurate leading to quality measures to be inaccurate. Findings include: Patient #9 was an 89-year-old female admitted to the HHA on 1/8/26 for wound care. Patient #9’s medical history included leg ulcers, dementia, incontinence, and chronic kidney disease. Patient #9 resided in an assisted living facility. An observational visit with the RN was conducted with Patient #9 on 3/11/26 beginning at 11:30 AM. After wound care, the RN spoke with facility staff and noted the Patient had completed her round of Macrobid on 3/4/26 which she had taken for 5 days due to a reported UTI. The Infection Control Coordinator, also the DCN, was interviewed on 3/4/26 beginning at 3:20 PM and Patient #9’s medical record was reviewed in her presence. She was asked if Patient #9’s most recent UTI was captured in the incident reports. The DCN confirmed this latest infection of Patient #9 was not captured. She confirmed patient infections of any kind were reportable as incidents. Patient infections were not captured consistently.”

    Rule G0684. Standard-level.

  • Receive All Services In Plan Of Care

    The inspectors’ words, 181 words

    “Receive all services in plan of care CFR(s): 484.50(c)(5) Receive all services outlined in the plan of care. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on medical record review, observational visits, and staff interviews, it was determined 1 of 10 patients (Patient #7) whose records were reviewed, did not receive all services requested on their plan of care. This had the potential to leave patient needs to remain unmet. Findings include: Patient #7 was a 70-year-old female admitted to the HHA on 2/17/26 for wound care. Patient #7’s initial plan of care included a Social Worker evaluation. An observational visit with the bath aide was conducted on 3/11/26 at 2:30 PM. Patient #7 stated she was expecting a Social Worker visit but had not received one yet. An interview was conducted with the DCN on 3/11/26, beginning at 3:00 PM and Patient #7’s chart was reviewed in her presence. She confirmed the initial order included a social work evaluation. She also confirmed there had been no social work visit for Patient #7. The plan of care was not followed.”

    Rule G0436. Element-level.

  • Plan Of Care Must Include The Following

    The inspectors’ words, 621 words

    “Plan of care must include the following CFR(s): 484.60(a)(2)(i-xvi) The individualized plan of care must include the following: (i) All pertinent diagnoses; (ii) The patient’s mental, psychosocial, and cognitive status; (iii) The types of services, supplies, and equipment required; (iv) The frequency and duration of visits to be made; (v) Prognosis; (vi) Rehabilitation potential; (vii) Functional limitations; (viii) Activities permitted; (ix) Nutritional requirements; (x) All medications and treatments; (xi) Safety measures to protect against injury; (xii) A description of the patient’s risk for emergency department visits and hospital re-admission, and all necessary interventions to address the underlying risk factors. (xiii) Patient and caregiver education and training to facilitate timely discharge; (xiv) Patient-specific interventions and education; measurable outcomes and goals identified by the HHA and the patient; (xv) Information related to any advanced directives; and (xvi) Any additional items the HHA or physician or allowed practitioner may choose to include. This Element is not met as evidenced by: Based on medical record review and staff interview, it was determined the agency failed to ensure the POCs included all interventions, measurable outcomes, medications, and goals for 2 of 11 patients (Patient #1 and #5) whose records were reviewed. This failure resulted in incomplete POCs and had the potential to result in unmet patient needs. Findings include: Record review showed Patient #1, a 70‑year‑old man, was admitted to the HHA on 4/11/25 for skilled nursing services, including medication management and education. The initial RN assessment on 4/11/25 documented multiple risk factors including a history of falls, decline in mental/emotional/behavioral status within the past three months, difficulty complying with medical instructions, use of five or more medications, reported exhaustion, and other risks. The assessment also documented Alcohol Dependence issues and PTSD with symptoms described as “2-controlled with difficulty, affecting daily functioning, patient needs ongoing monitoring.”Patient #1’s record included “alcohol precautions,” but no documentation of education or interventions addressing alcohol use in combination with psychiatric medications or the patient’s prescribed oxygen at 2 LPM. The POC documented a visit frequency of “SN 1WK2” (one skilled nursing visit per week for 2 weeks). Patient #1’s record did not include documentation of goals or interventions related to PTSD or alcohol dependence. During an interview on 3/11/26 beginning at 3:30 PM, the RN who completed the initial visit stated confirmed neither alcohol dependence nor PTSD were addressed in the POC or interventions provided. Patient #1 was discharged from the HHA on 4/21/25 following his death on 4/18/25. 2. Record review showed Patient #5, a 72‑year‑old female, was admitted to the HHA on 1/28/26 with the primary diagnosis of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease as well as additional mental health diagnoses, including major depressive disorder and delusional disorder. Both mental health conditions were documented as “2 – Symptoms controlled with difficulty, affecting daily functioning, patient needs ongoing monitoring.” Additional risks documented at the start of care included a decline in mental, emotional, or behavioral status within the past three months and the patient was “confused and disorganized and has a hard time focusing on nurse.” Documentation of goals or treatment plans addressing the patient’s delusional disorder or major depressive disorder were found in the POC. Review of RN and PT visit notes dated 1/30/26, 2/4/26, 2/11/26, and 2/19/26 showed no interventions, assessments, or monitoring related to the patient’s mental health diagnoses. During an interview on 3/11/26 beginning at 3:30 PM, the Director of Clinical Nursing (DCN) reviewed Patient #5’s medical record and confirmed the POC did not include interventions specific to the patient’s mental health diagnoses. The DCN further confirmed there was no documentation showing depression was monitored during RN or PT visits. The facility failed to ensure all pertinent diagnoses were addressed in the POC and appropriate interventions were provided.”

    Rule G0574. Element-level.

The one inspection in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Mar 12, 2026Recertification inspection4 deficiencies cited

Is it certified?

  • Medicare-certified home health agency since Jul 3, 2008.
  • Ownership: proprietary (for profit).
  • No deficiency on record in the last three years.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has anything been proven against it?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • 0 deficiencies cited in the last three years came from inspections that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, QCOR home health inspection reports. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Who does the caring?

  • Offers nursing care, physical therapy, occupational therapy, medical social services and home health aide services.
  • Doesn’t offer speech pathology.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for home health agencies.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Cornerstone Healthcare Inc. owns 100% directly since Jul 24, 2013.
  • 5 owners or officers are people: Brent Mills (corporate officer, 0%); Brent Guerisoli (corporate director, 0%); Craig Sanderson (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); John Gochnour (corporate officer, 0%); Amber L Tueller (corporate officer, 0%).
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Agency All Owners and Home Health Agency Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
Cornerstone Healthcare Inc.Owns 5% or more directly100%Jul 24, 2013
The Pennant Group Inc.Owns 5% or more through other companies100%Oct 1, 2019

How do patients fare?

  • CMS rates its quality of patient care 4.5 of 5.
  • Patients rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (96 surveys completed): 83% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 73% would definitely recommend it.
  • CMS compares it with the national rate: discharged to the community, better; potentially preventable hospital stays, the same; potentially preventable readmissions after discharge, the same.
Source:

CMS, Home Health Care Agencies and Home Health Patient Survey. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Quality of patient care ratingCMS star rating, 1 to 5 in half stars4.5 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the agency’s patients, 1 to 53 of 5
Discharged to the communityCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate92.77% (better than the national rate)
Potentially preventable hospital staysCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate8.76% (same as the national rate)
Potentially preventable readmissions after dischargeCMS’s risk-adjusted rate, compared with the national rate3.92% (same as the national rate)

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 9 agencies CMS’s data show serving patients in ZIP code 83301, where this agency’s office is, 9 have a quality of patient care rating; the middle one is 3 of 5, and this one is rated 4.5 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Home Health ZIP Codes and Home Health Care Agencies. Released Oct 21, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for home health agencies, so none are shown.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • QCOR says some of its home health reports are accurate or available only through May 19, 2021, because of a systems migration.
  • Many home health agencies are inspected by a private accrediting organisation instead of the state, and QCOR’s home health file doesn’t appear to include those inspections: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Oct 24, 2026.

From the agency

The public record above comes first. Anything the agency adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the agency will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the agency”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.